The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1887-11-22
CAUGHT n THE COURTS.
CoFFMAN MURDER CASE GIVEN TO
THE JURY, WHICH HANGS FIRE.
Full Text of this Courts Special Charge
In the Case, Relative to the Grades
OF Crime-New Term Begun in the
Circuit Court Chancery Calendar.

Circuit Court hancery Calendar.
The CoAman murder case has Mt last
gone 10 the jury, which body has been
unable to agree upon verdict, Col.
Harry Hill concluded his argument for the
State about II o'clock, after which Judge
DuBose delivered his charge, the special
features Of which were as follows:
THr COURTS SPECIAL CHARGE.
"Ydu will apply the law as explained to
you to the facts Of this case, first TO ascer-
tain whether the charge OF murder in the
first degree has been sustained, and after
ward should You acquit the defendant OF
this otTcnSc then to the several oilcnses in
their order, as given you in this charge. IL
is not claimed on behalf OF the State that
the defendant slew the deceased by means
oi poison, or tia; the act oi killing done
WIS the commission ol or attempt 10 COM
init some one al the iclonies herein named,
but that the defendant murdered the de-
ceased willfully, deliberately, prcmodiiat-
edly. II the proof shows that the de-
PENDANT had, prior a. the act Ot killing M
charged, a difficulty with the deceased,
and that deceased had stricken him sew.
crgl severe blows upon the body with q
heavy stick; that the deceased then ran
nway and defendant went TO or was ear.
Rod Ia his Office or place Of business,
where lac was in the habit Of sleeping ut
night, aud there laid down ON his bed,
and, after 10: aiming in his room for several
houn deceased was brought before him,
aud hc lduicndanil arose from his bed,
dressed himself and deliberately tied the
hands ui deceased behind his back with u
rope, aud after decreased had remained In
this condition fcw minutes while de-
PENDANT went outside, talked and con-
suited with other persons who were pres
ent, then came in and compelled the de-
ceased TO 90 With them, and, taking him
decreased the distance OF half n mile or
more 10 some secluded spot in the river
bottom, shot him then and there 10
death, and aitorward, 10 conceal the crime,
he, with the cooperation Of his confcder.
alcs, put o weight about the body and
east il into the river, that itsmuddy waters
might forever hide Il from vision, II these
OF like facts are shown, then the jury
might De well warranted in finding the
defendant guilty Of murder in the ilrst de-
gree. Such a state of iaclH would show
that the killing OF defendant was done
wilfully; that II, Of purpose with the In.
tent that the act 10y which bis life was
taken should have That effect deliberately;
that Is, with cool purpose, maliciouslyi
that IT, with malice aioruthought, and
with reconciliation; that is, the design "a
kill the deceased must have been formed
u, the Office Of the defendant, OF on the
way 10 the river bottom, or, at any rate,
formed before the net Of shooting the de-
ceased was performed by which death was
produced. In oihcr words, the proof must
satisfy your minds that the death Of the
deceased was the ultimate result Of
CunCuThnp, with dclihcration and prcmcdi-
taiion, OF the defendant and others at the
time Of killing before you could find
him guilty Of this Oilunsc, and II the act
al killing Is wanting in either Of these
necessary elements Of murder in the tirst
degree, as explained 10 you, then rs to
this olicnse your verdict should be not
guilty. II the proof shows that the dc.
ceased was killed by other persons, and
that the net WINS done williully. deliberate
~, maliciously aud with pUmCdilalion,
aud the defendant was present, either
actually or construciiNely aiding and abet.
ting. OF rady aud concerning 10 aid and
cipal offender, and equally guilty with
i;,s,-, vtii,i persons ~ muriur Ia the inst
dogrcc. IL u not necessary that the proof
chow that the defendant actually aided In
the commission oi the oticnsc, IN order
10 mako him apriucpal, n he watched ior
hts companions, in order 10 prevent sur.
Iaisc, OF renamed ut convenient distance
in order 10 favor their escape, il necessary
ur was In such situation ne TO be alb,
readily To come g. their assistance, a.,
knowledge Of which waH calculated 10 Civ,
additional confidence 90 hia companion
engaged In the commission oi tho crime
hen, In either event II the proof show th
iCicndnnt 90 be- Ia such situation when do
,cagcd WIS murdered ~ changed, he would
n contemplation of law, bo aiding am
,bciting In the crime, aud as guilty us ia
,cnon OF pcr0ns Who actually committee
he murder.
"On the other hand, II the proof iail {
how that tho defendant was pr'scnt, cithc
actually or consiruciiyoly, although h
may have moved, melted, counsclcd, hired
commanded cr procured these other pci
sons 60 commit The murder. be would no
Do guilty M charged IN the indictment
and Il would h. YOUR duty 10 acquit him
The defendant relics on the defense of ri
tlihi Ia this osfr; that IL. that lac was, q
he time the crime was alleged 10 hay
been committed, In different place; and
asa nccg ur, inicWnco hc could not hay
conniitpd H. Tho defense Of an abb,
clearly, certainly and fully established,
very conclusive oi the defendants innl
CCncc. But IL j. one liable 90 abuse, lrui
the case with which Il c1ncocicd, Who
a dc, "a exists 10 practice fraud on IA
State, and when even that design does n,
exist, by ignorant mistakes a. Ia particuls
houu and lapse Of time, that L rcQuip
great sincincss and attention on the PEI
uf the jury 20 avoid being mislod by H.
81, however. question OF proof for N
iury. aud must h. determined In cunncCtio
with al the other facts and circumstance
oi the case considered together. II ii
proof ui an alibi in this case In conncctio
with the other proof raises a rcasonah
doubt la your minds ~ 10 whether the IL
icndani wac at the place whore dcceasc
Wa lillod, or NJ different place, the ii
fcndlnt should b. acquitted The Il
frndan, insists that the principal Wiinc
(1ioml iuf the state IL an accDmplicc
The muplcr charged % hnyc been con
mircd by defendant, and therefore oann
H. believed unless lac be- corrobomied |
other witnesses or proof In the case, viii
che State dcnica the proposition of bis b
ing an acc0mplicc, vet admits that II II
true the witness should be Currubomt,
bcforr iull faith and credit IL placed In i
Iiatcmcnta ltthCn becomes matter foryu
determination in the first place whoth
tho witness WIS an accomplish, and In u
next, u Il be shown that ho was an accol
,.ft.. A., tha cFftua WHISTLER lo WAS a.
TohOra;cd by other witnesses or proof
the case, and 10 the extent which Won
reader his statements worthy Of belief 4